How did we get here?

The saga of what to do with the £496m Olympic Stadium goes back to before London won the bid in 2005. Claims that London's would be a sustainable Games, deliver unprecedented legacy benefits and leave behind no white elephants helped to secure its victory. Then came the difficult bit.

What was the difficult bit?

Former sports minister Tessa Jowell failed to get a football club interested in moving in and a Stade de France-style solution with retractable seating was considered too expensive and too much of a gamble. Desperate to get on with building and mindful that Seb Coe had promised a track and field legacy, it was decided the 80,000 seat stadium would be reduced to a 25,000 capacity athletics-only bowl after the games. But concerns persisted over whether it could pay its way.

Where do West Ham come in?

The coalition came to power united with London mayor Boris Johnson in a belief that only a big football club could make the stadium pay. The new chair of the Olympic Park Legacy Company, Baroness Ford, also wanted to think bigger than the 25,000-seat athletics stadium in the plans. That coincided with West Ham coming under new ownership and Spurs being encouraged to bid for a long-term lease. A full tender followed, sparking a bitter battle between the two clubs that took in accusations of moonlighting and dirty tricks. West Ham promised to retain the track, while Spurs insisted the only commercially sustainable solution was to rip the stadium down and start again. West Ham won in February – amid continued questions about whether football and athletics could co-exist.

So why was the deal with West Ham scrapped?

Spurs and Leyton Orient, worried about the impact on attendances if West Ham moved on to their manor, launched a legal challenge that has dragged on since. A high court judge found that there were sufficient grounds for a judicial review on the basis that a £40m loan from Newham council to West Ham towards the £95m cost of converting the ground may contravene EU state aid rules and the government began to fear an embarrassing "legal paralysis".

What next?

There will be another tender for a simplified rental agreement, which will come at more upfront price to the public because they will have to bear the costs of the stadium conversion from an 80,000 capacity athletics venue to a 60,000 seat football stadium with a full roof, hospitality and all the other trappings of a Premier League ground. But it gives the legacy company and the government more flexibility over time. If all goes to plan, West Ham will still move in before the 2014-15 season. But depending on whether a solution can be found that marries football with athletics, live concerts and community use while covering the stadium's costs the spectre of a white elephant living off public subsidy will haunt the area well beyond the Games.